Re: libpq / SQL3
Chris Bitmead <chris@bitmead.com>
From: Chris Bitmead <chris@bitmead.com>
To: Postgres Hackers List <hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2000-07-09T04:51:21Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote: > What might be the best bet is for this translation function to return > "short" as in the spec, with the spec-defined values for the datatypes > known to the spec, and a single "UNKNOWN" value for everything else. > Apps that need to tell the difference among user-defined types could > look at either the type OID or the type name, taking a binary- > compatibility risk if they insist on using the OID in binary form > (as long as they treat it as an ASCII string they probably aren't > affected by 4 vs 8 bytes...) But a bog-standard app would never look > at either, because it's only using bog-standard datatypes, no? I agree, but perhaps for different reasons. I don't see any other choice. I'm making good progress on implementing the SQL99, but it is a lot trickier than I thought. libpq is cruftier than meets the eye. Can anybody (i.e Peter :) provide any insight on how the SQL99 API handles variable length datatypes where you don't know the length in a particular tuple in advance?